Assessment of nivolumab benefit-risk profile of a 240-mg flat dose relative to a 3-mg/kg dosing regimen in patients with advanced tumors.

BACKGROUND: Nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks (Q2W) has shown benefit versus the standard of care in melanoma, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), and renal cell carcinoma (RCC). However, flat dosing is expected to shorten preparation time and improve ease of administration. With knowledge of nivolumab safety, efficacy, and pharmacokinetics across a wide dose range in body weight (BW) dosing, assessment of the benefit-risk profile of a 240-mg flat dose relative to the approved 3-mg/kg dose was approached by quantitative clinical pharmacology. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A flat dose of 240 mg was selected based on its equivalence to the 3-mg/kg dose at the median BW of ∼80 kg in patients in the nivolumab program. The benefit-risk profile of nivolumab 240 mg was evaluated by comparing exposures at 3 mg/kg Q2W and 240 mg Q2W across BW and tumor types; clinical safety at 3 mg/kg Q2W by BW and exposure quartiles in melanoma, NSCLC, and RCC; and safety and efficacy at 240 mg Q2W relative to 3 mg/kg Q2W in melanoma, NSCLC, and RCC. RESULTS: The median nivolumab exposure and its distribution at 240 mg Q2W were similar to 3 mg/kg Q2W in the simulated population. Safety analyses did not demonstrate a clinically meaningful relationship between BW or nivolumab exposure quartiles and frequency or severity of adverse events. The predicted safety and efficacy were similar across nivolumab exposure ranges achieved with 3 mg/kg Q2W or 240 mg Q2W flat dose. CONCLUSION: Based on population pharmacokinetic modeling, established flat exposure-response relationships for efficacy and safety, and clinical safety, the benefit-risk profile of nivolumab 240 mg Q2W was comparable to 3 mg/kg Q2W. The quantitative clinical pharmacology approach provided evidence for regulatory decision-making on dose modification, obviating the need for an independent clinical study.

Effect of nivolumab on health-related quality of life in patients with treatment-naïve advanced melanoma: results from the phase III CheckMate 066 study.

BACKGROUND: Nivolumab has shown significant survival benefit and a favorable safety profile compared with dacarbazine chemotherapy among treatment-naïve patients with metastatic melanoma in the CheckMate 066 phase III study. Results from the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) analyses from CheckMate 066 are presented. PATIENTS AND METHODS: HRQoL was evaluated at baseline and every 6 weeks while on treatment using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Care (EORTC) Core Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) and the EuroQoL Five Dimensions Questionnaire (EQ-5D). Via a multi-step statistical plan, data were analyzed descriptively, cross-sectionally, and longitudinally, adjusting for baseline covariates, in patients having baseline plus ≥1 post-baseline assessment. RESULTS: Baseline-adjusted completion rates for all HRQoL questionnaires across treatment arms were 65% and 70% for dacarbazine and nivolumab, respectively, and remained similar throughout treatment. The mean baseline HRQoL scores were similar for patients treated with nivolumab and dacarbazine. Baseline HRQoL levels with nivolumab were maintained over time. This exploratory analysis showed a between-arm difference in favor of nivolumab on the EQ-5D utility index and clinically meaningful EQ-5D improvements from baseline at several time points for patients receiving nivolumab. Patients treated with nivolumab did not show increased symptom burden as assessed by the EORTC QLQ-C30. No HRQoL change was noted with dacarbazine patients up to week 43, although the high attrition rate after week 13 did not allow any meaningful analyses. Patients receiving nivolumab deteriorated significantly later than those receiving dacarbazine on several EORTC QLQ-C30 scales and the EQ-5D utility index. CONCLUSIONS: In addition to prolonged survival, these exploratory HRQoL results show that nivolumab maintains baseline HRQoL levels to provide long-term quality of survival benefit, compared with dacarbazine in patients with advanced melanoma.

The pharmacokinetics and safety of twice daily i.v. BU during conditioning in pediatric allo-SCT recipients.

Intravenous BU divided four times daily (q6 h) has been shown to be safe and effective in pediatric allo-SCT recipients. Though less frequent dosing is desirable, pharmacokinetic (PK) data on twice daily (q12 h) i.v. BU administration in pediatric allo-SCT recipients is limited. We prospectively examined the PK results in a cohort of pediatric allo-SCT recipients receiving i.v. BU q12 h as part of conditioning before allo-SCT. BU levels were obtained after the first dose of conditioning. PK parameter analysis (n=49) yielded the following 95% confidence intervals (CI95): weight-normalized volume of distribution: 0.65-0.73 L/kg; t(1/2): 122-147 min; weight-normalized clearance (CL(n)): 3.4-4.3 mL/min/kg; and area under the curve: 1835-2180 mmol × min/L. From these results, a steady state concentration was calculated with CI95 between 628-746 ng/mL. Comparison between recipients ≤4 vs >4 years old revealed significant differences in t(1/2) (mean: 115 vs 146 min, P=0.008) and CL(n) (mean: 4.4 vs 3.5 mL/min/kg, P=0.038). Intravenous BU q12 h had a comparable PK to i.v. BU q6 h PK seen in the literature, and in pediatric allo-SCT recipients, is a feasible, attractive alternative to i.v. q6h dosing.